Another thing about "as good as" that bears repeating - if you subscribe to that creed then why not save even more money and get a Vulcan or Hesse or Blackthorne instead of DPMS! Hey, their parts fit too!

Something else to think about, you can buy a "mountain bike" at Walmart for maybe $125 and it'll get you around the block. But take it out and use it like the name implies and see how long it lasts. I read a statistic that the average new bike from Walmart gets ridden about 75 miles by the original owner. So what does the manufacturer do, they use crappy bushings instead of hard steel bearings and cut corners everywhere in order to give you a $125 bike that will last 75 miles. The brakes may work in good weather on flat surfaces but what about going down a steep grade in the rain? Will the average buyer ever notice this, probably not, and the bike goes along pretty well until it gets a flat and is parked in the corner for five years then hauled off to Goodwill.

It's the same with almost anything you buy and you usually DO get what you paid for. Does it matter on a gun that will be shot a little, probably not. Does it matter in a life or death situation, yes. I know most of us can get by with less, I sure can - but I like knowing that the rifle or shotgun or handgun I'll reach for first on a bad day likely will empty a magazine if need be.

Just because I believe this you don't have to. We're all free to form our own opinions.

__________________
______
The biggest issue with assembling an AR isn't so much getting the parts together right - it's getting the right parts together.
________________________________________
US Army 1966-69, VFW Life Member, Retired Geek

"Mil spec is mil spec"?? When they refer to mil spec it is referring to minimum acceptable quality. Would to trust your life and the life of your family with buying tires that had minimum acceptable tread left on them? Mil spec does not mean the best quality. it is the lowest standard possible. These standards are used when our military contracts with the lowest bidder.

Ahhhhh kinda true with some things we buy but not all. Mil spec in out m16 means that they must meet or exceed our standards and our standard are higher when it comes to weaponry. What they look for is reliability in a weapon. And with my time in will tell you I have seen many m16a1, a2, a4 and M4's and I have seen more FNH's jam then Colts. Only time I has my 16 jam was when I fired blanks. And they can take a big beating

When it comes to quality and price, I certainly agree that a $125 Walmart bike is probably absolute crap.

However , if one were to participate in a cycling forum , IMO, you might run into the snobbery that anything that wasn't custom-made and cost $10k is crap. Well, pretty much everybody knows that's not true. To continue the analogy, Back in 1992 I bought a "Giant Iguana" Mtn bike. It wasn't expensive for a "bike shop" bike... about $400. It was still in fine shape in 2007 when I donated it to an orphanage...

But, after riding it a while, I could see why it was less expensive than a top-of-the-line bike by Giant. The features were not there. BUT, FOR THE KIND OF RIDING I DID.... it was more than enough.

So, after a lifetime of experience like that I have similar questions like that. For example, why would I pay $1000 for a Remington 700 when I have one that I bought at Walmart for $400? I really don't care about an ornate wood stock. What is different between them... those are the kinds of questions that I'm interested in. One of my earliest Remington's was a 770. After a little bit of use, and owning a 700, I know very well what many of the differences are.

I WILL learn the differences, in the AR world... but I try to avoid, as a novice , buying utter crap.

So quentin, since you mention cost and quality as being a major issue, and usually you get what you pay for, does that mean that my $450 dollar glock or M&P is a pos and my $1200 springfield 1911 isnt? in all reality, my glock or m&p will work far better than the 1911 and be less finicky with ammo, require less maintenance, may not be as accurate out to distance, but will work. And in a shtf scenario, i will take a glock or M&P over my 1911 any day of the week, but hey, its a cheap plastic pistol. Glock went through the exact same thing as del-ton when they came out yet look at them now...I have a browning light 12 semi auto shotgun, as well as a mossberg 500, remington 870. Price wise, very big difference, but which is "better"? well, the 870 and 500 have long ago proven themselves in the real world, but in the shotgun world, they are "cheap"... and again, i would take either of them over the browning in similar scenario. Same applies to rifles. Everyone seems to think that if it is not a custom build with this or that part on it, than it is a pos and will fail. Again, they are all machines and ALL will fail at some point. My comment of mil spec was just that, everyone always throws out commercial versus mil-spec, versus better than mil spec, and this seems to be a selling point. Well, since "mil-spec" is what everyone just must have because of what the name implies, every single del-ton except their entry level sporter model is the same "spec" as every mil spec colt, armalite, daniel defense, lmt, ect. If someone has the money and wants to go spend it on a name brand than by all means, have at it. But a name does not mean it is necessarily better. My stag is a better shooter than any other rifle I have, and it is all stock less cosmetic furniture. And it was the cheapest.

Since we are now into analogies... Hyundai in the 90's was considered a "cheap' pos car... A few years experience and now look at them. . . well, dpms makes what quite a few consider the "best" factory 308 ar platform rifle for the money. . . Del-ton has time and again been reviewed by guns and ammo, American rifleman, and quite a few others and received excellent reviews for cost, reliability, and durability. So why does everyone still seem to think that they are a cheap pos? Yeah, maybe there sporter models are not the best, but they are aimed at a different type of shooter, same as smith,bushmaster,dpms, and others that throw a commercial grade sporter model out there as a "cheap alternative". Ive said it before and i will say it again... Parts are shared between them,with a few exceptions, meaning that they get their parts from other manufacturers and put in the weapons, stamp their name on the side and sell them as "their name brand".

And as seen mentioned a few times, "if my families life depended on it...." If my families life depended on it, I wouldn't be grabbing an ar-15 anyway. Why would i when ballisticly you need 100 yards for the round to reach its intended effective ballistics? That's not saying that up close it wouldnt do the job, thats just saying that in a real life scenario, there are better choices for close range, such as a shotgun or even a 30-30. Ive got a 12 gauge pump with slugs that will do by far better in that situation, and i dont have to worry if it will fail or jam! At distance, well, there are again better options such as my 30-06,308, or 300 mag, but then apply cost to shoot...I would take my mini 14 over any of my ar's for reliability, even if it is not as accurate at distance. But hey, with putting extra money in it, such as a bull barrel, upgraded gas block, different trigger, ect, it could very well be, but why bother? well, that's what you are paying for with your more expensive ar's.

And to add and answer as to "do I know what mil-spec is", yes I do. It is the standard set forth by the military when ordering a product from a manufacturer. All it is is standardization so parts can be changed easily and they "meet certain technical specifications" for functionality. As for the quality of mil-spec itself, varies from what it is in reference to, uniforms, gear, electronics, ect...But in weapons, just refers to a certain or specific standardized design and build quality to meet minimal standards for function, reliability, and designed as to be able to easily replace parts or swap between one another if needed.

So that being said, one could now debate which is better, commercial grade or mil-spec? But I think that we would all have the same opinion on that one just for easy of replacing parts.

So quentin, since you mention cost and quality as being a major issue, and usually you get what you pay for, does that mean that my $450 dollar glock or M&P is a pos and my $1200 springfield 1911 isnt? in all reality, my glock or m&p will work far better than the 1911 and be less finicky with ammo, require less maintenance, may not be as accurate out to distance, but will work. And in a shtf scenario, i will take a glock or M&P over my 1911 any day of the week, but hey, its a cheap plastic pistol. Glock went through the exact same thing as del-ton when they came out yet look at them now...I have a browning light 12 semi auto shotgun, as well as a mossberg 500, remington 870. Price wise, very big difference, but which is "better"? well, the 870 and 500 have long ago proven themselves in the real world, but in the shotgun world, they are "cheap"... and again, i would take either of them over the browning in similar scenario. Same applies to rifles. Everyone seems to think that if it is not a custom build with this or that part on it, than it is a pos and will fail. Again, they are all machines and ALL will fail at some point. My comment of mil spec was just that, everyone always throws out commercial versus mil-spec, versus better than mil spec, and this seems to be a selling point. Well, since "mil-spec" is what everyone just must have because of what the name implies, every single del-ton except their entry level sporter model is the same "spec" as every mil spec colt, armalite, daniel defense, lmt, ect. If someone has the money and wants to go spend it on a name brand than by all means, have at it. But a name does not mean it is necessarily better. My stag is a better shooter than any other rifle I have, and it is all stock less cosmetic furniture. And it was the cheapest.

Since we are now into analogies... Hyundai in the 90's was considered a "cheap' pos car... A few years experience and now look at them. . . well, dpms makes what quite a few consider the "best" factory 308 ar platform rifle for the money. . . Del-ton has time and again been reviewed by guns and ammo, American rifleman, and quite a few others and received excellent reviews for cost, reliability, and durability. So why does everyone still seem to think that they are a cheap pos? Yeah, maybe there sporter models are not the best, but they are aimed at a different type of shooter, same as smith,bushmaster,dpms, and others that throw a commercial grade sporter model out there as a "cheap alternative". Ive said it before and i will say it again... Parts are shared between them,with a few exceptions, meaning that they get their parts from other manufacturers and put in the weapons, stamp their name on the side and sell them as "their name brand".

And as seen mentioned a few times, "if my families life depended on it...." If my families life depended on it, I wouldn't be grabbing an ar-15 anyway. Why would i when ballisticly you need 100 yards for the round to reach its intended effective ballistics? That's not saying that up close it wouldnt do the job, thats just saying that in a real life scenario, there are better choices for close range, such as a shotgun or even a 30-30. Ive got a 12 gauge pump with slugs that will do by far better in that situation, and i dont have to worry if it will fail or jam! At distance, well, there are again better options such as my 30-06,308, or 300 mag, but then apply cost to shoot...I would take my mini 14 over any of my ar's for reliability, even if it is not as accurate at distance. But hey, with putting extra money in it, such as a bull barrel, upgraded gas block, different trigger, ect, it could very well be, but why bother? well, that's what you are paying for with your more expensive ar's.

You're not quite comparing apples to apples. Comparing Glock or M&P to a 1911 is like comparing a Toyota camry to a '69 Camaro resto-mod. Same goes for comparing a high-bred autoloading shotgun to a rack grade pump 870 or mossy 500.

The metaphor that Q is trying to get you to arrive at, in the Del-ton vs....... argument would be the same as if S&W charged the same price for a Sigma, that Glock does for the same TYPE of gun. I don't think anybody would argue that the Sigma should be cheaper than the Glock.

Comparing apples to apples... It is the same as how he regarded the walmart mountain bike. Still a mountain bike, same as a glock or m&p are still 45acp. The reference was just to show that just because something cost more, or is "considered" better doesnt necessarily make it so. I hate a glock, but own 1. Does it work, every single time. Now my 1911 on the other hand can be a little finicky. It is "better built" and tighter fit than either of the other 2 mentioned. Is it more accurate, not really. The sigma, everyone learned from experience. It came from Smith, very well regarded company, but look what it was. It was their first attempt to step into a market that they had no experience with, a polymer handgun. They tried and learned. The M&P received the same criticism when it came on the market as being another sigma...Now look at where the m&p stands in the minds of people. Same with ar's. Just because there are or have been some that were lemons, doesnt mean that every company that comes along offering one that is "cheaper" price wise means that it is of a lesser quality. Colt has had issues, as has many other well regarded companies.

As for the shotgun analogy, that again was to show the difference. Does my "lite 12" shoot any better than my 870, or my 1100 for that matter. It shoots "softer" and that is about it. My 1100 shoots just as good, as the browning. Beyond that, it is cosmetic differences. You can take a 870 and make it better, like Wilson Combat does. Take a 870 base model and "upgrade" certain parts, cost more than it is worth, but in reality, does it function any better than a stock version?

The argument at hand was weather someone should get a del-ton or a dpms and everyone jumped and said, "no spend more money and get this", and then each gave their own opinion as to why. Well, what about the smith and wesson sport m&p15. A budget oriented ar rifle, less dust cover and foward assist, and cost roughly 300 less, give or take, than the next model up. But, the internals are the same less chroming certain parts. It is cheaper than both the Del-ton or DPMS models. Is it a bad rifle? Not according to everyone who has shot one, owns one and reviewed it.

Odds are, that not one single person will ever use their ar for a shtf, or a combat situation, and since that is reality, why would one need to spend "extra" to have something that does what better?

Everyone is going to have an opinion... On every single forum, there are discussions of Colt,Noveske,Spikes,DD,BCM, LMT, ect all having some kind of failure, from barrels to cracked bolts, or what have you. Its ok when they fail, because they are "made better?" Yet they are still always the ones recommended...

A little side tracked but just another mention of quality... In the electronic world, when Vizio came out, they were regarded as the poor mans wide screen tv, or "cheap" because they cost less. Noone who could afford "better" wanted one, and everyone said "stay away"... Again, look how opinions have changed.

The whole argument is pointless, just like arguing over which 1911 is better, which polymer handgun, which bolt rifle... Which CAR! It is all a matter of opinion. If you want to believe that because someone said, or the manufacturer said, then great! If you sleep better at night "knowing" you own the "best", then great!

Comparing apples to apples... It is the same as how he regarded the walmart mountain bike. Still a mountain bike, same as a glock or m&p are still 45acp. The reference was just to show that just because something cost more, or is "considered" better doesnt necessarily make it so. I hate a glock, but own 1. Does it work, every single time. Now my 1911 on the other hand can be a little finicky. It is "better built" and tighter fit than either of the other 2 mentioned. Is it more accurate, not really. The sigma, everyone learned from experience. It came from Smith, very well regarded company, but look what it was. It was their first attempt to step into a market that they had no experience with, a polymer handgun. They tried and learned. The M&P received the same criticism when it came on the market as being another sigma...Now look at where the m&p stands in the minds of people. Same with ar's. Just because there are or have been some that were lemons, doesnt mean that every company that comes along offering one that is "cheaper" price wise means that it is of a lesser quality. Colt has had issues, as has many other well regarded companies.

As for the shotgun analogy, that again was to show the difference. Does my "lite 12" shoot any better than my 870, or my 1100 for that matter. It shoots "softer" and that is about it. My 1100 shoots just as good, as the browning. Beyond that, it is cosmetic differences. You can take a 870 and make it better, like Wilson Combat does. Take a 870 base model and "upgrade" certain parts, cost more than it is worth, but in reality, does it function any better than a stock version?

The argument at hand was weather someone should get a del-ton or a dpms and everyone jumped and said, "no spend more money and get this", and then each gave their own opinion as to why. Well, what about the smith and wesson sport m&p15. A budget oriented ar rifle, less dust cover and foward assist, and cost roughly 300 less, give or take, than the next model up. But, the internals are the same less chroming certain parts. It is cheaper than both the Del-ton or DPMS models. Is it a bad rifle? Not according to everyone who has shot one, owns one and reviewed it.

Odds are, that not one single person will ever use their ar for a shtf, or a combat situation, and since that is reality, why would one need to spend "extra" to have something that does what better?

Everyone is going to have an opinion... On every single forum, there are discussions of Colt,Noveske,Spikes,DD,BCM, LMT, ect all having some kind of failure, from barrels to cracked bolts, or what have you. Its ok when they fail, because they are "made better?" Yet they are still always the ones recommended...

A little side tracked but just another mention of quality... In the electronic world, when Vizio came out, they were regarded as the poor mans wide screen tv, or "cheap" because they cost less. Noone who could afford "better" wanted one, and everyone said "stay away"... Again, look how opinions have changed.

The whole argument is pointless, just like arguing over which 1911 is better, which polymer handgun, which bolt rifle... Which CAR! It is all a matter of opinion. If you want to believe that because someone said, or the manufacturer said, then great! If you sleep better at night "knowing" you own the "best", then great!

I'm not debating the merits of the argument...I'm very fortunate to be able to afford what I want, and don't have the experience with the lower priced brands to really contribute to the thread on that front.

What I am saying to you tho, is that polymer vs 1911 and autoloader vs pump shotgun are not apples to apples. The lowest end 1911 in most cases will cost what a good polymer gun will. Same with the scatterguns. It is inherent to the design that parity in the prices won't exist. Its just not a fair comparison. And I took the mountain bike analogy differently, so I don't see the correlation.